More stories

  • in

    Remembering David Bonderman, a Private Equity Pioneer

    A former lawyer, he cofounded the giant investment firm TPG and became known for complex deals that remade corporate America. He died on Wednesday at 82.David Bonderman, a founder of TPG, in 2018. “He built and led an impressive firm,” David Solomon of Goldman Sachs said of Bonderman.Stephen B. Morton/Associated PressRemembering BondoDavid Bonderman, a corporate lawyer who co-founded the giant investment firm TPG and helped transform private equity into a multitrillion-dollar industry that reshaped Wall Street, died on Wednesday morning. He was 82.Bonderman — Bondo to his friends — became a private equity pioneer, leading big and complex takeovers that saw corporate titans go public, and whose success helped persuade publicly traded companies to adopt his industry’s tactics, DealBook’s Michael de la Merced writes.Bonderman’s entry into private equity was by happenstance. After graduating from Harvard Law School, he taught law and then worked as a civil rights lawyer for the Justice Department. He went on to join the Washington law firm Arnold & Porter. Among his achievements there was persuading the Supreme Court to overturn an insider-trading conviction of Raymond Dirks, a securities analyst turned whistle-blower.In the mid-1980s, Bonderman was approached by Robert Bass, the Texas oil magnate, about helping run his family office. Bonderman said that he had never invested professionally before, but Bass told him that he hadn’t either.Bonderman and a colleague in the family office, Jim Coulter, founded what became TPG in 1993. By then, the two had made their names by buying Continental out of bankruptcy and turning around the embattled airline. (Emblematic of their approach: They FedExed undesirable food from the plane to Continental’s C.E.O., telling him it needed improving.)They joined a small group of financiers who turned leveraged buyouts from a cottage industry into a Wall Street behemoth, borrowing money to buy, restructure and flip big businesses.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Albertsons Backs Out of Merger Deal and Sues Kroger After Court Rulings

    The supermarket chain had tried to join forces with Kroger, but judges sided with federal and state regulators who charged that the merger would reduce competition.The grocery chain Albertsons said on Wednesday that it had backed out of its $25 billion merger with Kroger and sued its rival for failing to adequately push for regulatory approval, after both a federal and state judge blocked the deal on Tuesday.The deal, which would have been the biggest grocery store merger in U.S. history, faced three separate legal challenges — one filed by the Federal Trade Commission — over concerns that the combined company would reduce competition and raise prices. Judge Adrienne Nelson of U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon temporarily halted the deal on Tuesday, siding with federal regulators who have argued that the merger would lessen competition at the expense of consumers and workers.Another decision blocking the merger in Washington State court, issued by Judge Marshall Ferguson just one hour later, added to the hurdles facing the companies.“Given the recent federal and state court decisions to block our proposed merger with Kroger, we have made the difficult decision to terminate the merger agreement,” Vivek Sankaran, chief executive of Albertsons, said in a statement. “We are deeply disappointed in the courts’ decisions.”On Wednesday, Albertsons also said it filed a lawsuit against Kroger in the Delaware Court of Chancery, seeking billions of dollars in damages and accusing Kroger of failing to exercise “best efforts” to secure regulatory approval. Kroger refused to divest assets necessary for antitrust approval, ignored regulators’ feedback and rejected strong buyers of stores it had planned to divest, Albertsons said in a statement announcing the lawsuit.Erin Rolfes, a spokeswoman for Kroger, disputed Albertsons’s claims, calling them “without merit.” Albertsons breached the merger agreement multiple times, she said in a statement, and the company filed the lawsuit in an attempt to deflect responsibility and seek payment for the merger’s termination fee.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Guardian Confirms Sale of The Observer to Tortoise Media

    The Guardian Media Group said it had struck a deal to sell The Observer to Tortoise Media, shortly after a 48-hour strike by journalists had ended.The Observer, a British Sunday newspaper that has been running for more than two centuries, will be sold to the digital media start-up Tortoise Media, the publication’s owner, the Guardian Media Group, said Friday, despite staff protests.The boards of the Guardian Media Group, which also publishes The Guardian, and the Scott Trust, the owner of the Guardian Media Group, have agreed “in principle” to the deal, which is expected to be signed in the next few days. The announcement came shortly after journalists at the two news outlets waged a 48-hour strike, calling the deal “rushed” and a risk to the journalism of both newspapers.The Guardian’s parent company, which bought The Observer in 1993, did not disclose the sale price. But it said the Scott Trust, a 1.3 billion-pound ($1.7 billion) fund, would invest in Tortoise Media and become one of its largest shareholders. The trust will also have representatives on the company and editorial boards of Tortoise Media, which said it had raised £25 million to invest in The Observer.“We knew we needed the right combination of resources and commitment to build a new platform for The Observer,” Ole Jacob Sunde, the chair of the Scott Trust, said in a statement. “It required an ally to be sufficiently funded, long-term in nature, and respect editorial independence and liberal values. I believe we have found this in Tortoise Media.”When the proposed sale came to light in September, it was a surprise to the papers’ journalists, who raised concerns about the ability of Tortoise Media, a six-year-old company that has not recorded a profit, to preserve the future of The Observer.Amid pressure from the staff to reconsider the deal, the Scott Trust pushed to have some say in the editorial direction of The Observer after the sale. Journalists at both newspapers walked off the job on Wednesday and Thursday, hoping to delay the deal. It was the first strike in the newsroom in more than 50 years.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Guardian Journalists Strike Over Planned Sale of The Observer

    Workers have begun a 48-hour walkout, the first in 50 years for the outlet, over a proposal to sell The Observer to Tortoise Media, a digital media start-up.Journalists at the Guardian and the Observer newspapers in Britain began a 48-hour strike on Wednesday over plans to sell The Observer, the country’s oldest-running Sunday publication, to a digital media start-up.Workers picketed outside their newsroom in London to protest the proposed sale to Tortoise Media, arguing it had been “rushed through” without the support of the staff.It is the first strike in more than 50 years for Guardian News & Media, which publishes both papers. The Observer has run in print since 1791. The plans to sell it came to light in September and were a surprise to journalists, who are now calling for the company to pause sale negotiations and consider alternatives.The deal is nearly done and could be announced soon, according to a person briefed on the talks who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the details were private. The Scott Trust, the owner of both publications, wanted to ensure that it would remain one of the largest shareholders with a say in The Observer’s editorial direction, an issue that was expected to be resolved shortly, the person said.“It can’t be right to go ahead with a rushed sale when journalists haven’t been consulted and we do not understand the logic for this,” said Sonia Sodha, a columnist for The Observer who was on the picket line Wednesday morning. “We think it puts both Observer and Guardian journalism at risk.”The Guardian bought The Observer in 1993. Executives have said the sale would allow the company to focus on international expansion.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    BlackRock Acquires HPS, a Major Lender of Private Credit

    The world’s largest investor is buying HPS, a major provider of private credit, for $12 billion.BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, is known for its heft in the public markets, particularly through its iShares exchange-traded funds.But this year, BlackRock has been aggressively claiming a major foothold in the private markets. On Tuesday, it made its latest push, announcing a deal to buy HPS Investment Partners — a firm that specializes in making private loans to companies — for roughly $12 billion.Buying HPS, which manages $148 billion in investor money, would fundamentally reshape almost any other financial firm in the world. For BlackRock, which manages about $11.5 trillion for its clients, that figure is just a small percentage of its overall asset base.Still, the deal to buy HPS, after two other significant private-market transactions this year, is helping answer a question that BlackRock’s own investors have been asking: With so much money already, where can BlackRock grow?Early this year, BlackRock spent roughly $12.5 billion to acquire Global Infrastructure Partners, a major investor in airports and data centers across the globe. In June, it announced a $3 billion deal to buy Preqin, a major data provider for the private markets.The HPS deal will make BlackRock one of the five largest providers of private credit in the world.Private credit is a corner of finance that has exploded in recent years. A number of nonbank investment firms, including HPS, Blue Owl and Ares, have become major lenders to large, typically highly indebted companies. In doing so, they’ve taken market share away from major banks.In the past decade, this private-credit market has grown to about $2 trillion, more than 10 times its size in 2009. In its news release announcing Tuesday’s deal, BlackRock predicted that the market would more than double to $4.5 trillion by 2030.BlackRock’s chief executive and chairman, Laurence D. Fink, said investors were increasingly looking for a mix of both private debt and publicly traded bonds. “The blending of public and private credit is a standard for long-term durable fixed income portfolios,” he said on a conference call on Tuesday.Investors appeared to like the deal, sending BlackRock’s stock up nearly 2 percent Tuesday. This year, its stock has jumped 30 percent, outperforming the S&P 500, which is up about 27 percent.While most analysts, including Glenn Schorr at Evercore ISI, cheered the deal, Mr. Schorr offered a note of caution on BlackRock’s recent spate of deal-making: “It does come with execution risk as money, power and integration issues” arise. More

  • in

    U.S. Plans to Propose Breakup of Google to Fix Search Monopoly

    In a landmark antitrust case, the government will ask a judge to force the company to sell its popular Chrome browser, people with knowledge of the matter said.The Justice Department and a group of states plan to ask a federal court late Wednesday to force Google to sell Chrome, its popular web browser, two people with knowledge of the decision said, a move that could fundamentally alter the $2 trillion company’s business and reshape competition on the internet.The request would follow a landmark ruling in August by Judge Amit P. Mehta of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia that found Google had illegally maintained a monopoly in online search. Judge Mehta asked the Justice Department and the states that brought the antitrust case to submit solutions by the end of Wednesday to correct the search monopoly.Beyond the sale of Chrome, the government is set to ask Judge Mehta to bar Google from entering into paid agreements with Apple and others to be the automatic search engine on smartphones and in browsers, the people said. Google should also be required to share data with rivals, they said.The proposals would likely be the most significant remedies to be requested in a tech antitrust case since the Justice Department asked to break up Microsoft in 2000. If Judge Mehta adopts the proposals, they will set the tone for a string of other antitrust cases that challenge the dominance of tech behemoths including Apple, Amazon and Meta.Being forced to sell Chrome would be among the worst possible outcomes for Google. Chrome, which is free to use, is the most popular web browser in the world and part of an elaborate Google ecosystem that keeps people using the company’s products. Google’s search engine is bundled into Chrome.Google is set to file its own suggestions for fixing the search monopoly by Dec. 20. Both sides can modify their requests before Judge Mehta is expected to hear arguments on the remedies this spring. He is expected to rule by the end of the summer.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    Is the Biden Administration Coming for Chrome?

    The Justice Department is reportedly targeting Google’s web browser as its antitrust enforcers seek to cement a major win before Donald Trump takes office.Can the Biden administration’s antitrust enforcers succeed in breaking up Google before they leave office?Josh Edelson/Agence France-Presse — Getty ImagesA parting antitrust shot by Biden’s enforcersBefore the Biden administration’s antitrust leaders step down, they’re taking their final shots at Big Tech. That will reportedly include an effort to break up Google as a consequence of the Justice Department’s successful competition lawsuit against the company.A forthcoming request to force the sale of the Chrome browser, according to Bloomberg, would be one of the most sweeping competition demands in years. But it will also be a test of the second Trump administration’s own antitrust agenda.Chrome is a crucial part of Google’s business. The industry’s dominant web browser — it controls about 61 percent of the U.S. market, according to Bloomberg — is a potent data-collection portal, steering people to the company’s search engine. That gives Google the ability to track users when they are signed in, and can be used to for targeted ads.Chrome has also become a gateway for Google’s A.I. services, including its Gemini chatbot, which some say could eventually follow user activity across the web.The Justice Department decided against requesting the divestiture of Google’s Android smartphone operating system, Bloomberg reports. But it wants the company to stop bundling it with services including search and the Google Play app store.If successful, the split would cement a crucial legacy for Biden’s antitrust team. It’s unclear how much of the aggressive approach promoted by Lina Khan of the F.T.C. and Jonathan Kanter of the Justice Department will survive. A Chrome divestiture would achieve the kind of corporate breakup that regulators failed to force upon Microsoft two decades ago.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    The Onion Buys Alex Jones’s Infowars Out of Bankruptcy

    The satirical news site planned to turn Infowars into a parody of itself, mocking “weird internet personalities” who peddle conspiracy theories and health supplements.The Onion, a satirical publication that skewers newsmakers and current events, said on Thursday that it had won a bankruptcy auction to acquire Infowars, a website founded and operated by the conspiracy theorist Alex Jones.The Onion said that the bid was sanctioned by the families of the victims of the mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, who in 2022 won a $1.4 billion defamation lawsuit against Mr. Jones and his company, Free Speech Systems.Everytown for Gun Safety, a nonprofit dedicated to ending gun violence that was founded in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook shooting, will advertise on a relaunched version of the site under The Onion.The publication plans to reintroduce Infowars in January as a parody of itself, mocking “weird internet personalities” like Mr. Jones who traffic in misinformation and health supplements, Ben Collins, the chief executive of The Onion’s parent company, Global Tetrahedron, said in an interview.Family members of the victims of the Sandy Hook shooting, which claimed the lives of 20 first graders and six educators, sued Mr. Jones in Connecticut Superior Court in 2018 after he spread the baseless claim that the rampage was a fabricated pretext for confiscating Americans’ firearms.The Onion declined to disclose the price it paid for Infowars and its assets, including its production studio and diet supplement business. Mr. Jones could not immediately be reached for comment, but he said on the social media platform X this week that he planned to continue producing his online program, “The Alex Jones Show,” until he was forced to stop.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More